HomeMy WebLinkAbout20161043.tiff Submb by Email
CORRESPONDENCE RESPONSE
DEPARTMENT OF Planning Services
REFERRED TO (STAFF NAME) Tom Parko
DATE OF REFERRAL 03/14/2016
DATE RESPONSE DUE FROM STAFF 03/17/2016
*** IF RESPONSE WILL BE DELAYED, PLEASE NOTIFY "CTB GROUP" BY E-MAIL OF
EXPECTED DATE FOR RESPONSE.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Narrative:
Mr.Behring owns property located in the City of Evans which was destroyed by the 2013 flood. Mr. Behring is expressing
his concerns and frustrations with the City of Evan's and their lack of cooperation. Mr. Behring's letter addressed to
Commissioner Kirkmeyer outlines his concerns with Evan's and is requesting some assistance from the County. In the
letter, Mr. Behring requsted information on three(3)items.The three(3)items are addressed in the County's response
letter which is attached.
METHOD OF RESPONSE:
Board Action
Work Session
1 Letter (Attached)
Telephone Call
No Response (attach explanations)
Tom Parko
Department Head
BOARD ACTION: (INITIAL BY APPROVAL) SM dC, SC MF `BK�.
AGREE WITH RECOMMENDATION - x )(
REQUEST WORK SESSION -
CMiniThWiltaJitar M:\CTB\OPMAN\LETTER OF CONCERN FORM.DOC
3-g1- 00i(o 2016-1043
1861 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES
1555 N. 17TH AVENUE
rr f GREELEY, CO 80631
970-353-6100 EXT 3572
v ,G O U N T FAX 970-304-6498
tparko@weldgov.com
March 16, 2016
Ernest Behring
3610 Boulder Street
Evans, Colorado 80620
w/copy to: erniebehring@msn.com
Dear Mr. Behring,
Thank you for contacting Weld County. Your letter addressed to Commissioner Kirkmeyer dated
March 10, 2016 was forwarded to my attention. I am sorry for your losses that you have sustained on
your property. The flood of 2013 impacted the livelihood of so many great people in Weld County
it's difficult to comprehend the utter devastation. The area in and around the City of Evans was hit
hard by the flooding and your property in particular sustained severe damage.
Your letter poses three (3) questions to the County that relate to our process and how we have
handled flood related issues. The first question asks if we were aware of any homes that were washed
off foundations, but were not considered a loss. Following review of our records the homes in
unincorporated areas that were knocked off their foundations were total losses and considered
substantially damaged. This means that the loss of the property was in excess of 50% of the assessed
value.
The second question deals with demolition permits. The criteria for demolition permits is located in
Chapter 29 of the Weld County Building Code. I understand that the City of Evans has an asbestos
concern with some of your structures which is outlined in the letter from Mr. Ratkai. From Weld
County's perspective, if a homeowner wanted to demolish a house for the purpose of constructing a
new house, there is no inspection requirement for asbestos. The only thing that is required is that any
asbestos that is friable, easily crushed or crumbled, should be removed prior to demolition. With that
said, each jurisdiction has their own set of regulations and can vary across the County.
The third and final question is with respect to whether or not the County is still issuing permits for
structures damaged or lost due to the flood. The answer is yes. Although it's been 2 %2 years since the
flood we still work hard to make sure that those effected by the flood get the permits they need to
rebuild.
I hope that this answers your questions and please don't hesitate to contact me if you need assistance.
Again, I am sorry foryour losses and wishyou all the best moving forward.
ga �
Sincerely,
Tom Parko
Director, Department of Planning Services
Cc: County Commissioners
aN
CD
"C
a
0
O a
>+ CO v
U) (d >, v,
C O
U M Q.
r. _ (_)CU
Q.)U ) i >
I X C
O CU
X J I I_ I Z w II .� �• red s. • , <• , iX 1 r -• P _p a5 Z
03
•�F•• "`` i ^ .� a {''' +r' ,.,p: ; r ` % h.
j ,� i_1.dw .�4, 40 4 al. 14N, 3„ * ND- O ii a i. ff �, t�i. L(1 Y
_ p ^ w�
'Y 9 Y 1 r ` r O W V )
i
,I T.) I w
Ill ... r— sU 0
.ti F—
v, F_
" o r 0
4-jI 4- C Z
O L
Q ro 0• .+ _ 1~r _ a Q
• I .. _.-v tom" ..w.. ar.�a.u....•r...�. �J
_ ... 'X _. •
I. . _--__ _ _� OD
fil.._ _ __ ..._._..___r_. F_
• r v,
il .- .
, .„..,
(,:, >,
,,,,-,.._ 1 „Ta
q ,,
1. , 1, t ! iA4 .. if,
4 . . . co
, _4_,
, 1
, m f 4 4 ..
X Y b.
I, rd v
v
a.,
e K .
v
I iI `A
, 4
2K
I
WI Zvi
II 3
1 l •"' v
;,� i I i ji
INb 4. °'
-I--1 I . I II if;
c.
,..._ ,,,. . .. ,...,
. e
sib f
W t .. .
L.-- is: .
A ) `
r
.ate "it ill
P.
r fil
(1.) 1? Pei ha. • • # Mill)1 ---...--
.•c : .
iv 7 4
Sillik •flu
rd
OQ ' 1 '
X
4. _., - - li Iffr r <:(-3
. . yy 1 aQ `• *1 S r -IS ' � iall M. 111000 V V
J
Zilb S p
J ?
s ; , �I U• 41014140
,4 •. 4 t r• er liri,
C
11 q 44 i ` Xa I
al
1 ( ttlit
-1 -nal I:. ". I CU
1
yT ..)
•. a t
li
p '
i, 4tip4 r
Rafaela Martinez
From: Rafaela Martinez
Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 2:58 PM
To: Tom Parko Jr.
Subject: LETTER OF CONCERN - COUNTY RESIDENT
Attachments: 2353_001.pdf; Letter of Concern Form.pdf
Hello,
Please see the attached Letter of Concern from Weld County Resident Ernest Behring. Also attached is a "Letter of
Concern — Form" that you will need to fill out and return to the Clerk to the Board's Office within Three (3) days
along with a the response to the County Resident.
Please let the CTB Staff know if you are unable to make this three (3) day deadline, as this item will need to be
listed on the Board of County Commissioner's Agenda.
Thank you,
Rafaela 11. Martinez
Deputy Clerk to the Board
1150 0 Street/P.0, Box 7581 Greeley, CO 80632
tel: (970) 400-4225
fax: (970) 336-7233
� r
Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure.If you have received
this communication in error,please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication.Any disclosure,copying,
distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named
recipient is strictly prohibited.
From: CM103
Sent: Monday 1LA "TWIN xvt 40-1701Y1. Pahxo
To: Rafaela M
Subject: Attac L'onwa
Y
Cozad Arn I Pn '
Freeman G1 '
Kirkmeyer cYf
Moreno h-
Ernest Behring
3610 Boulder St.
Evans, CO 80620
970.978.6054
erniebehr@msn.com
March 10, 2016
County Commissioner Barbra Kirkmeyer
1150 O Street
PO Box 758 RECEIVED
Greeley, CO 80632
Re: Demolition Permits
WELD COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
Dear Commissioner Kirkmeyer:
I am a resident and property owner in Evans that suffered loss during the flooding of 2013. I
owned the six most severely affected permanent homes in Evans. I am writing because of the
stark contrast between the assistance the county provided and is providing those affected and
what it is the City of Evans has done and is doing.
Let me give a brief summary of my circumstance. I have a three acre lot bordering the east side
of the mobile home park that was most severely impacted. The place had six stick built homes,
a modular and numerous outbuildings. The river came through at four to five feet. I had homes
torn from foundations. Arguably all structures were lost. But, I have rebuilt one of the homes
and four of the outbuildings survived. I believe the five others were the only permanent houses
in Evans that suffered complete loss. Despite all evidence to the contrary Evans claims the
homes were not complete losses.
The flood put me out of compliance. The structures were beyond repair; they were nuisances
and health hazards.
And all avenues to compliance were closed before the place had started to dry.
•
Zachariah Ratkai, the department head of something let me know that I must proceed with an
asbestos inspection—but he would not permit access to the homes for inspection. Enclosed is
my request for help or direction along with his absolute refusal.
That is not the case throughout the county. It is my understanding that similar and more tragic
circumstances occurred in the county. And the county summarily issued permits for demolition
where warranted. I have seen the state issued directives that allowed it. The county gladly
issued permits where it was obviously necessary.
I believe if you can or will answer any of the following it may benefit. Are there circumstances
where homes washed off foundations were not considered lost? What are the criteria for
issuing a flood demolition permit? Is Weld still issuing permits for qualifying structures?
It requires 90 minutes or more to recount my misery with Evans, but the short of it is they won't
do what the county did in weeks allow total losses to be removed without nightmare. The
state issued allowances for it. I know of no other jurisdiction that did not allow it. I so wish I was
two blocks east and in the county's jurisdiction.
A SBA inspection confirms the loss. A structural engineer confirms the loss. Two appraisers
from the Weld Assessor's office looked a couple of times. The city's engineer observed the
loss. An Evans"SAP" inspector was there and posted "UNSAFE TO ENTER OR OCCUPPY"
orders on the homes.
If there are insights or nuances you have that I might not, I will be grateful for them.
Weld was and is seeking to help people. I believe Evans is making a land grab.
I am enclosing the SBA inspection. https://a.gfx.ms//pdf_57.png It is password protected.
Lo$$fy2015
Thank you for your service,
Ernest Behring
4 ('ih of
EVLllS, Colorado
Community Development
N.Zach Ratkai,Manager 1970.475.1111 I aratkai@evanscolorado.gov
Iffifdt2Ofif 14
Mr.Ernest Behring
3610 Boulder St
Evans,CO 80620
Re:Denial of Demolition Permit
Mr.Behring:
Your recent submittal for a demolition permit for structures on the property of 120 37th Street in Evans
has been denied due to the lack of provision of a state certified asbestos certificate.The damage to your
property was deemed to be building damage only and not declared as Tier I debris and therefore is not
exempt from the asbestos inspection requirement.
Please get all structures you wish to demolish inspected and certified through this process and bring in
all certificates from the State of Colorado to the Evans Building Department and then the demolition
permit can be released.
Once the demolition permit is issued,staff will be able to remove all"UNSAFE TO OCCUPY"placards
from the structures.These placards cannot be removed until either each structure is inspected and
deemed safe by a licensed structural engineer,or a demolition permit is issued.
If you have any questions,please contact me at any time.
Sincerely,
✓ Vi `fl r
//, ,,../,,,t_ "`--,
N.Zach Ratkai
Community Development Manager
Cc:File
Fred Starr,Public Works Director
Ernest Behring
3610 Boulder Street
Evans, CO 80620
erniebehr@msn.com
970.978.6054
Zachariah Ratkai
City of Evans
1100 37th St.
Evans, CO 80620
June 18, 2014
Re: Demolition Permit and water billing
Mr. Rakai:
On the 13th I received a Certificate of Occupancy for my house at 118 37th St. Thank you for
your cooperation in that happening. I know the city is eager for advancement in that
neighborhood. It is happening.
I am writing today because I am in need of more cooperation from the city and I must advise
you of some miscommunication within the city.
There are several structures on that same lot that I wish to remove. I applied for a demolition
permit most of two weeks ago. I am sure you are aware that the application requires approval
from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. I called and spoke with
Becky Wilson at CDPHE. She advised me that if I had houses off of their foundations I need not
apply to them. I included her name and recommendation on my application to your office.
Friday, Ms. Kelly Schaffer called to tell about the Certificate of Occupancy at 118. Additionally,
in reference to my demolition application, she let me know"Only the mobile home parks are
tier 1." Tier meant absolutely nothing to me, I think it was relatively new to her, but the jest of
it was that I will be responsible for changing the minds of the folks at CDPHE.
It is at this point that I find myself at a variety of roadblocks I am hoping you will assist me with.
Please permit me to present some background here which may help. In the days following the
water's receding I watched an inspector from FEMA onsite assessing the plight of dislodged
tenants. I am certain he observed the placement and condition of the former homes.
Sometime after that an inspector from SBA and I surveyed the property and I know we
observed and he made specific note of the dislodged,former homes. The assessor's people
have seen it at least twice. The city engineer and the nice lady in charge of the fence building
around the mobile homes parks saw it. I can't guess how many others have seen it. But of
greatest relevance--on September 23, 2013 Evans inspector SAP 64367 was there.That
inspector posted orders: "UNSAFE DO NOT ENTER OR OCCUPY." That inspector must have
noticed there was open air, and then dirt beneath the leading walls while taping those orders.
It is here that I need to make requests of you, or advisement from you, as I am far less than
certain what is needed or how to proceed.
First, please, how I am classified?
Please give definition to tier 1 and to other definitions of damage. Ms. Wilson did not make
mention of tiers, she did make reference to buildings washed from foundations, is that the
definition of tier 1 in short?
If this definition is close, can we have SAP 64367,or another qualified inspector re-examine the
property for the purpose of reclassification?
In the event there is no reclassification, and inspection of the structures is necessary should
assume the do not enter order no longer stands?
If that order has been or will be lifted, please tell me when. I need to proceed.
In other concern, I need a straight answer with regard to the city's water billing at this property.
In introduction, I have three water taps and meter pits at the place. Only two of them have
ever been in service. I have paid for service at two meters since 2007.
After the flood, I paid the bills through the September, 20 billing cycle. I didn't think it would
hurt to pay the extra week after service was terminated. After all everyone at the city had a full
plate at the time and no doubt it would corrected in due course. Then the bills through Oct. 18
showed up. One of them was even showing usage. At that point I went up to city hall to let you
know. The clerk found somebody in a back office who came up and we all had a chuckle 'bout
flushing not yet going on in that neighborhood. I was told the usage issue was due to that crazy
estimator guy whom nobody can set straight. I received a verbal assurance that the billing
would be corrected and I was sent on my way. By January nothing had changed except that I
had a couple of meetings with Fred Starr. On the 9th he told me that the physical removal of
the meters from the pits is necessary to end billing. I advised him that if that is the rule, I
wanted them out on September 13. He said he would terminate billing as of that date. I don't
know if the meters were pulled before or since. I know it made no difference.
Fast forward to about six weeks ago: The billing hasn't stopped. The usage has again started.
And I am trying to get water on at the house under repair. Nancy Salazar calls to let me know
that I owe a May, 2013 water bill in addition to every cent I have been billed since September—
for the monthly letters threatening to shut of water,for shutting off every month of the meters
that are not there,for service availability which I have not received,for sewage--no one is
denying I've been a recipient of city sewage rather than a supplier since September 13. Your
best case might be for storm drainage, but that seems an issue for comedy. Additionally, Ms.
Salazar has advised me that failure to pay fees on the 120 meter will result in the loss of rights
to the tap.
The city has now set a meter and the water is on at the house at 118. I have not been required
to pay a cent, but I am guessing from a letter of Ms. Salazar dated June 6th, (included) I am in
for doozies.
By my count I have been given six distinctly different scenarios for utility billing, but to the city's
credit only one has been presented on paper.
For it's worth, my stand is that I have had no improvements on that property from the 13th of
September until I received a Certificate of Occupancy for one house last Friday. I do not foresee
further improvements, other than,of course,the removal of destroyed buildings.
I do not foresee needing a second or third tap, but I hardly want to surrender them. My
impression is that Ms. Salazar's threat was an off the cuff effort to get me to pay up and shut
up. But if there is truly an avenue for the city to accomplish a cessation of water taps, please
let me know.
Finally,the apparent indiscriminant and continuing addition of tens of thousands of gallons to
my water bill is of no small concern. Can you tell me when the meter and/or the electronic
readers were placed? Can you provide records of usage? Do you know how "the estimator"
works?
Mr. Ratkai, I know the lost revenue and increased expenses from the flood has the city in
financial straits, I am in a position to understand. I don't believe billing for services not rendered
is the way out.And it is jaw-dropping to find that Evans is not aware that houses were washed
from foundations. I know Evans inspector SAP 64367 saw it, I know the county saw it, I know
the Feds saw it. And now Evans tells me it ain't there.
IT IS STILL THERE. I want to get rid of it. If you will approve, I can.
Please,
Ernest Behring
1
Hello